Karnataka Court September 2008 Judgments

Smt. U. Nalini Bai and anr. Vs. the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Mangalo ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2008KAR5089

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. The Karnataka Debt Relief Act, 1976 which followed the ordinance prior to the Act coming into force was enacted by the State with the sole object of extending the relief to a class of debtors. Unfortunately, instead of getting the relief, it has only resulted in harassment and victimization of such debtors. This writ petition is one such classical case of harassment of the debtor who figures as second respondent in this writ petition.Petitioners have called in question the legality of the order dated 27.11.2006 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mangalore Sub-Division, Mangalore [copy at Annexure-J] acting under the provisions of the Karnataka Debt Relief Act, 1976 [for short 'the Act'] directing the first petitioner to produce before the authority within ten days from the date of the order thirteen items of gold jewellery said to have been restored in favour of the first petitioner by the authority, pending proceedings under the Act.2. Petitioners...

The Management of Cosmos Engineering Represented by Its Partner, Sri S ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2009(121)FLR370]; 2009(4)KarLJ353; 2009(1)KCCR621

P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. The short question that arises for our consideration in tins appeal is whether the Labour Court is right in setting aside the order of retrenchment dated 1.10.2001, in spite of rendering a clear finding that there is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned retrenchment, merely on account of the right conferred on the respondent-workman under Section 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947?2. After going through the detailed award dated 12th October, 2004 of the Labour Court, we find that the Labour Court was carried away by the letter issued by the management on 3.8.2002 offering employment to the respondent-workman when a vacancy arises subsequent to the retrenchment The said award was challenged by the management in writ petition No. 49182 of 2004.3. The learned single Judge confirmed the order of reinstatement of the respondent with continuity of service. However, direction with regard to payment of 20% backwages of the Labour Court was set aside. Hence...

Sri A. Viswanatha Pai Vs. Sri Vivekananda S. Bhat

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR171:2009(1)KCCR508:2009(2)AIRKarR186:AIR2009NOC1233:2009CriLJNOC429.

ORDERArali Nagaraj, J.1. The petitioner herein who is accused in C.C. No. 11091/2004 before the learned XVIACMM, Bangalore (herein referred to as 'Trial Court' for short) has challenged the legality and correctness of the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 3-5-2006 passed in the said case convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (herein after referred to as 'N.LAct' for short) and also the judgment dated 11-12-2007 passed in Crl.A. No. 944/2006 by the learned XXXVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge (CCH37), Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'Appellate Court' for short) confirming the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court.2. Though this case was listed on 9-9-2008 for admission, it was taken up for final disposal by consent of the learned Counsel for both sides and their arguments on merits were heard. I have perused both the impugned judgments and also the entire material on reco...

Sri. Mohammed Nasrulla Sheriff Son of Late Md. MoiuddIn Sheriff Vs. Sm ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(5)KarLJ516; 2008(5)KCCR3483; 2009(1)AIRKarR521; AIR2009NOC1283

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This revision petition under Section 46(1) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 is by the tenant who has suffered an order of eviction in terms of impugned order dated 14.8.2003 passed by the X Addl. Small Causes Judge, Bangalore, in HRC No. 546/95 allowing the petition of the owner under Section 27(2)(r) of the Act which enables the landlord to seek eviction of the tenant for the bonafide use and occupation of the premises of the landlord and Section 31 of the Act which is a special provision in favour of the landlord who is a widow and can seek eviction of the tenant for her occupation with immediate possession of the premises if the premises is required by the landlord.2. It is this order which is questioned in this revision petition on the ground that the learned judge of the trial court has not taken into consideration the evidence on record. The fact that the petitioner whose requirement is pleaded has not entered the witness box by herself, should have...

Sri. A. Viswanatha Pai S/O Late A.K. Pai Vs. Sri. Vivekananda S. Bhat ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERArali Nagaraj, J.1. The petitioner herein who is accused in C.C. No. 11091/2004 before the learned XVI ACMM, Bangalore (herein referred to as 'Trial Court' for short) has challenged the legality and correctness of the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 3-5-2006 passed in the said case convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (herein after referred to as 'N.I Act' for short) and also the judgment dated 11-12-2007 passed in Crl.A. No. 944/2006 by the learned XXXVI Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge (CCH37), Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'Appellate Court' for short) confirming the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court.2. Though this case was listed on 9-9-2008 for admission, it was taken up for final disposal by consent of the learned Counsel for both sides and their arguments on merits were heard. I have perused both the impugned judgments and also the entire material on rec...

Sri H. Srinivas Reddy Vs. the Management of Bmtc, Represented by Its C ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2008KAR4753; 2008(4)KCCR2574

ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. The petitioner, a conductor while conducting the bus belonging to the respondent-Corporation on 5.11.1995 on route Attiguppc to City market, the checking officials intercepted the bus and on checking, found the following irregularities:1. Non issue of tickets after collection of fare of Rs. 1.25 ps. from each of eight passengers;2. Neither issued nor collected the fare of Rs. 1.25 from 12 passengers;3. Not recording the entries in the way bill in respect of tickets of Rs. 1.25 denomination, leading to failure to credit to the account of the corporation the sale of 62 tickets.2. The checking officials, in the presence of the petitioner secured the statement of the passengers alleged to have paid fares to the petitioner, to which the petitioner affixed his signature. The checking officials recorded the irregularities in an offence memo acknowledged by the petitioner, to which the petitioner did not submit a reply. The Disciplinary Authority on the basis of the ...

Sri G.V. Srirama Reddy S/O Obi Reddy and Sri C.D. Gangulapa S/O Dasann ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR279:2009(2)KCCR1026:AIR2009Kar27:2009(1)AIRKarR101

K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The 1st petitioner contested to the election to Karnataka Legislative Assembly from No. 140 Bagepalli Constituency. The 2nd petitioner is the election agent of the 1st petitioner. The 2nd respondent is the candidate who has successfully elected from No. 140 Bagepalli Constituency held on 10.5.2008. Petitioners have filed this petition challenging the validity of the election of the 2nd respondent. The petition is presented before the Registrar (Judicial) of the High Court on 7.7.2008. The Registrar has made the following endorsement:Presented by Shri V. Shivareddy, Adv. for the petitioners on 7/7/08 at 3.30 p.m. He is directed to attend the H. C. Registry within 3 days from today to remove objections, if any. Petitioners were not present while presenting this petition.Sd/-R(J) 7/7/08Section 81 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (for short the Act') reads thus:81. Presentation of petitions(1) An election petition calling in question any election may be prese...

Amolak Textiles Represented by Its Propritor Vs. Uphar Fashions Repres ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR628; 2009(3)KarLJ696:2009(1)KCCR249:2009(2)AIRKarR166:AIR2009NOC1232.

K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. All the seven appeals arise out of between the same parties and in respect of one and the same transaction where 15 cheques are issued towards repayment of loan liability. The cases are tried separately by the trial court and common judgment is rendered.2. The appellant/complainant prosecuted the respondent (accused) for commission of offence Under Section 138 of N.I. Act. It is the case of the complainant that the accused borrowed a loan of Rs. 1,95,000/- for his business purpose and issued 13 cheques valuing Rs. 15,000/- each.3. Two of the cheques on presentation dishonoured because of 'Stop Payment' instructions from the accused and other cheques are dishonoured for want of 'sufficient funds'. The Manager of the Bank is examined by the accused to prove that in respect of the 13 cheques, there was 'stop payment' instruction.4. The accused contends that his mother is ailing at Rajasthan and he had to go out and therefore, signed 13 self cheques, given it to his s...

Kareem S/O Sayeed Imam Sab, Vs. State by Sira Police by Public Prosecu ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009CriLJ1236; 2009(2)KarLJ366; 2008(5)KCCR3352

ORDERK.N. Keshavanarayana, J.1. The accused 1 to A in CC No. 888/1999 on the file of the Civil Judge (Jr. Dvn.) & JMFC, at Sira, have presented this revision petition under Section 397 Cr.P.C., questioning the legality and correctness of the Judgment of conviction and sentence dated 23.9.2002 passed by the learned Magistrate convicting these petitioners for the offences punishable under Section 143, 144, 147, 148, 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 149 IPC and sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for various periods for the aforesaid offences and also the Judgment dated 26.10.2003 passed by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. IV, Tumkur, in Criminal Appeal No. 51/2002, dismissing the said appeal and affirming the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Magistrate.2. Sira Police filed charge sheet against these petitioners and four others, for the aforesaid offences alleging that on 9,8.1999 at about 9.30 PM, when CW-2 Jaithun w/o. Hussain Sab, was sleeping ...

Mahender Kumar Gandhi. Vs. Mohammed Tajer Ali and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2008(10)SCC795

1. Pursuant to our order dated 9-9-2008, all the contemnors have appeared in person. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the tenants stated that his clients shall vacate the premises by tomorrow i.e. 19-9-2008, positively.2. Place the matter on 22-9-2008.3. The presence of Principal Rent Controller, who is present in person and the alleged contemnors, Atiya Begum, Rafathunnisa and Ruksana, is, for the time being, dispensed with. The alleged contemnor, Mohd. Tajer Ali shall appear on the next date of hearing also before this Court....